*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Sent
Saturday second of April 2016
by
[email protected] (Antony Phillips)
Note that this is a
resend of a message sent some years ago, and some data (like
addresses) is
liable to be inaccurate.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
[The replays are old, and of course there is no garantee that addresses
are
correct now. Judith Andersons preent email address is:
[email protected] ]
Subject:
TROM:
Replay B37
Date:
Fri,
28 Aug 1998 22:03:10 +0200
From:
Antony Phillips <[email protected]>
Organization:
International Viewpoints
To:
[email protected]
(Some of the material on Black Fives, etc. is published in the
current
issue of IVy, number 38 Aug 1998)
--
Ant
Antony A Phillips
[email protected]
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
Box 78
DK - 2800 Lyngby
Editor, International Viewpoints (= IVy). See Home Page:
http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/
Administrator: trom-l, selfclearing-l, superscio-l, IVy
lists
Subject:
Re: who owns TROM
Date:
Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:19:35
+1000
From:
Judith Anderson
<[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Dear One and All,
Anne Stephens gave me all of Dennis's research notes and materials
that
were available after his death as he had appointed me his Distributor,
and I
have corrected the typing errors and changed the sequence of chapters as
per
his original intentions. This new format will shortly be available on
the
Net (it has been distributed by me in this format for the last 2
years),
where it will be freely available to anyone wishing to avail themselves
of it.
It will be then available for anyone to translate or copy. Rewriting
is
another story, which hasn't really come up seriously, as it would
certainly
take someone's time.
If there was a serious suggestion I would suggest it also go on to the
net
after some consultation with say Judith Methven who is acting as
Technical
Advisor (along with Leonard Dunn).
A group of 6 people are in communication at the moment to facilitate
the
above so while I don't suggest holding your breath it probably won't be
more
than a month or two away. Homer being one of the 6, has offered to put in
on
the net from disc but can't spend the time to look after it as I
understand.
If there is anyone who has any comments or suggestions please feel free
to
contribute via e-mail as I am not an experienced computer person. Is
there
anyone who does have some time and/or expertise, we'd really appreciate
it.
Good Tromming, Judith (Anderson)
P.S. As there are two Judiths,(Anderson and Methven) it would be handy
if
when referencing us that you refer to Judith A or Judith M, eh?
:-)
At 08:31 PM 8/24/97 +0200, you wrote:
>See the latest replay to trom-l
>
>I think you short write a breif authoritive note sating:
>
>Who right now has "control"/"owns" trom?
>
>What the current policy is with regard rewriting and
translating.
>
>The replays coming up are likely to refelct the confused situation as
to
>those point two years ago - a confused situation can lead to conter
and
>other intentions. So let us see that there is no confusion in
PT.
>
>You could also, as well, or instead,invite a present time discussion
on
>what the ppolicies could be. Maybe a humble, yet effective,
attitude
>would be that you own the whole idea, are uncertain how to run it,
and
>would appreciate comments/ suggestions. That attitude would
encourage
>participation/contripution - both of which put people at cause.
>
>Hi,
>
>Ant
>
>
>
>--
>
Ant
Antony A Phillips
> [email protected]
>
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
>
Box 78
>
DK - 2800 Lyngby
>Editor, International Viewpoints (= IVy) see Home Page:
>
http://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html
>
>
>
Subject:
Re: who owns TROM
Date:
Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:55:58 -0400
(EDT)
From:
"Homer W. Smith"
<[email protected]>
To:
Judith Anderson
<[email protected]>
CC:
[email protected]
> A group of 6 people are in communication at the moment to facilitate
the
> above so while I don't suggest holding your breath it probably won't
be more
> than a month or two away. Homer being one of the 6, has offered to
put in on
> the net from disc but can't spend the time to look after it as I
understand.
Not sure what you mean by 'look after it'.
I will give you an archive directory where you may
place
the work on your own determinism, either in whole or in parts.
Ant can do this for you if you wish.
It will be robo posted to the net over time along with
everything
else in the archive, and PGP signed to assure non alteration.
It will also be available for anyone to download either
by
web page or ftp.
If you need more than that let me know.
Homer
Subject:
TROM communication
Date:
Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:52:41
+0200
From:
Antony Phillips
<[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Dear trom-l'ers
We have over 50 people on this list, and I strongly encourage members
to
originate a communication.
Introduce yourself.
You can certainly say something of your interests other than TROM.
This
would give a more complete picture of yourself. However the list
should
be reserved for discussion related to TROM.
If you say something about your other interests -- heed my warning:
You
may find yourself involved in private conversation to the other end
of
the globe. I understand that as a result of an introduction on this
list a one to one transatlantic conversation on nanotechnology was
started, and this is fine. But please send _all_ TROM communications
to
the list.
TROM has proven itself very valuable to a number of people. No-one
makes any money out of running it, which means no one has a finacial
interest in promoting it. So if it is to survive to the benifit of
many
more, volantary help is required. And there are so many different
forms
of help, and so many different people with very different abilities.
One relatively easy form of help is to write to this list, with your
comments, joys, griefs and questions about TROM.
As an editor of a very amateur magazine, I know that some people
have
what one might call an inferiority complex over their ability to
write,
and the usefulness of what they could contribute. If you yourself
feel
that way - overcome your shyness - write to
[email protected]
Could be you surprise yourself and others :-)
I suspect the more present time communication and the less replays
we
have, the better (though I will still keep posting replays - old
expereince is often good expereince).
--
Ant
Antony A Phillips
[email protected]
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
Box 78
DK - 2800 Lyngby
Editor, International Viewpoints (= IVy) see Home Page:
http://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html
Subject:
Black Fives and TROM
Date:
Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:12:50
+0200
From:
Antony Phillips
<[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Dear
Trom-ers,
Black Fives and TROM
This is a
contribution I intended to make when I took
over the TROM-l adminstration
post. First a little back
ground data.
I joined
the scientology movement (before it was a
church) in England in 1954.
Things were very different then,
and among the prominent
things was the question of mockups.
A mock up is a self created
"picture" (in three dimensions
containing all perceptions).
There were certain people who
could not mock up, or
"see" pictures of things that they had
experienced (memories). I was
one of those people, and we
were called black cases (when
we shut our eyes, what we saw
was blackness). Scientology
was supposed to be
non-evaluative, but
nevertheless, as a student on course one
became very aware that to be
a black case put one in a very
bad position in life and
scientology. A little later the
only way to achieve the
valued state of "clear" included a
mockup process which I
could'nt do. Inability to mockup made
me a little frustrated and
unhappy in the late 50's.
These black
cases were also called black fives, there
being levels of processing,
the most able people begining at
one, while black cases came
in low on the stage at five. By
the way, I don't take
responsibility for the truth of this.
It is just the impression I
had at the time - I am aware
that (especially more
recently) some funny ideas have been
passed on purporting to be
scientology which seem very
suspect to me.
Incidentally, I also came to realize that I _did_ get
"pictures" - my
problem was that I did not see them, and I
have succesfully run
techniques requiring getting mental
pictures of past incidents.
The most notable was being eaten
by a lion about 1,000 years
ago. The lion was there (in
mental form) while I ran it -
I just did not see it. It was
there, and so was the earlier
part of the incident when I
put attention on it (until it
erased, at which point I
started complaining loudly
that I could not see it, and was
put, sort of in disgrace,
onto objective processes).
As time
went on emphasis on mocking up lessened markedly.
I got gains from other
processes and was far from
dissatisfied. And a few years
ago I looked a bit at NLP
(Neuro Linguistic
Programming) and discovered that human
beings had at least three
different emphasises on Mental
perception. Some saw best,
some heard best, and some where
most aware of bodily things
(I won't look up and relay
details). This meant to me
that us black cases were not so
bad after all - we just had a
different mental perception
emphasis.
Incidentally I got fed up with trying remedies for black
cases.
Right - now to TROM.
TROM came
along, and I was overjoyed with the first three
levels, because, as I have
said before in this column, it
seemed to be a refinement of
the early things I had met in
the 50's, and modelled on a
do it yourself, don't pay high
fees, basis. And the results
I saw coming in matched my
expectations.
So with
much difficulty in finding regular time to do it,
I started running TROM: RI
and time breaking. Scheduled an
hour a day. Now I do not have
a good record of it. But this
is my memory of it.
Unsatisfying, uncomfortable. drudgery. I don't have
details available, but that
was the way I found it. And this
I believe was because I could
not _see_ the important things
I was mocking up, or the
things I was time breaking.
After a
period I stopped. There was an old scientology
principle that the preclear
(receiver of therapy) should be
getting wins all the time and
I was not getting wins. As far
as I can remember I did
between 15 and 26 hours at it before
giving up. I suppose I should
have raised the matter on
TROM-l at the time, but I was
discouraged, and had had so
much discussion and advice on
black cases (difficulties with
mock-ups) that I was
unwilling to confront more. Since that
time I have had a certain
amount of Idenics with good gains,
a win from reading and
applying an article on service
facscimiles (a scientology
term), and wins from a friend
running a scientology
objective process on me (called book
and bottle - a marvelous
process).
So I am not
dead, and I am not a non moving case.
But TROM
did not work.
Incidentally, having escaped (some 15 years ago) from the
cultish atmosphere of
Scientology Church, where one of the
broadly believed and
indoctrinated fallacies was that
scientology could solve
everything, I take particular
exception to similar claims
and implications with regard to
TROM.
People do
vary. What is right for one is not neccessarily
right for the rest of the
population of earth (and
satilites). Additionally,
loud perpetration of this myth
(that TROM is applicable to
all) seems to me likely to have
the effect of silencing those
who (like me) didn't get
anything out of TROM. Even of
discouraging those who could
get something out of TROM
from putting their problems on the
list.
We have a
fair number of silent people on this list. This
is the case with all lists,
and there is nothing wrong in
that. But I wonder if,
amongst the silent there are not one
or two like me, who have not
got anything out of TROM, but
are impressed by it.
Well, a
couple of years have gone by since I went through
that some what unpleasant
experience of trying TROM, and I
am now willing to receive and
handle any and all comments on
the above situation.
I also have
another "gripe" with regard to TROM - and
also other therapies. And
that is the inclusion of the word
and subject Nirvana. One of
the things I object to in latter
day scientology is the covert
"implanting" of goals to
adherants, rather than
letting them decide their own life. A
particularly nasty one is the
goal scientology "suggested"
to adherants of "total
freedom". And Dennis, unfortunately,
has done something similar,
by glorifying a state he calls
Nirvanah.
My view of
a therapy or religious practice is that it
should be something to help
people through the "downs" in
life, and enable them to
achieve full enjoyment of (and
ability to produce)
"ups" in life. And that they should have
freedom of choice on their
goals and aspirations. And not
have insidouos hints as to
what was "right" or acceptable.
I would
censor out all discussion of Nirvanah in TROM
(the book I mean).
Are there
any comments - or other TROM-ers not
"TROMable"?
All best
wishes,
private
citizen Ant.
Subject:
Re: Black Fives and TROM
Date:
Fri, 29 Aug 1997 02:25:59 -0700
(PDT)
From:
Allen <[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
At 09:12 PM 8/28/97 +0200, you wrote:
>
>
>
Dear Trom-ers,
>
>
Black Fives and TROM
>
>
This is a contribution I intended to make when I
took
> over the
TROM-l adminstration post. First a little
back
> ground
data.
...
Hi, Ant;
Thank you for the background. I have something on both your points.
First,
Black 5s.
I had a (business) client several years ago who had never seen a
mental
image in his life. 56 years old, owns a prototyping machine shop. He
builds the first copy of original designs.
I didn't even know about this. We were discussiing compensation
plans,
corporate & executive integrity, how to stimulate employee alignment
and
innovation. Not case-stuff.
I often used to say, while explaining things, the word-question
"See?" as a
check-in for if the client was following an explanation. This client put
a
big doubt on that practice one day by suddenly revealing a screaming
frustration that "No, goddammit, I do not see! I understand, but I
do not
see!"
He was embarrassed more than I was shocked, so it took a few minutes to
get
him to explain. I was very curious, but he was defensive about being
"different". I was able to persuade him that he could possibly
be of great
help to me as a personal consultant and thus who-knows-how-many people
in
the future, by freely discussing this thing and letting me test an idea
or
two on him. He might even benefit himself. He agreed.
The first thing I did was to convert my comprehension-checking to
various
forms of "Do you understand?". Things like, "Get it?"
and "Follow?"
(Americanism, maybe, for "Do you follow me (in my line of
reasoning,
etc.)?". His progress as a business client doubled
immediately!
The next meeting I asked him to help me duplicate how he perceived
intangibles and past events, etc. It was extremely difficult for me
because
I am wide-open visual, and learning to ignore daylight-bright imagery
while
trying to conceive of his perspective was head-busting. But I finally
did
it while he was explaining how he programs his CNC machines. I don't
remember what CNC stands for, but these are out-house-sized boxes that
are
like giant routers with changable bits. You put in a piece of material
and
program the thing and it does a Michelangelo: it cuts away everything
that
isn't the finished part.
Huh! Here's a guy who programs a computer from blueprints to carve a
part
out of a block of stuff, and *he has no idea what the part will look
like
before he gets it done*!!! How can he program the machine? I program
several hours a day, and even my conceptualizations of arrays and
sort
routines are visualized.
He reads the blueprint differently than I do. I see lines that float up
off
the page and flesh out into a wire-fram 3-d and then shimmer into
translucent holographic objects, as I notice the dimensions written on
the
plans and read the spec lists. By the time I have looked over a plan
the
first time I can already do a final product walk-through in my mind.
He
can't even see it _after_ it's built unless he's looking right at the
real
thing. Yet he always produces perfect parts the first time, every time.
I
don't think I could do that.
He works from information: memory like a steel trap for data, not
pictures.
So he goes through the blueprints developing the data for the
programming,
and then just enters the data into the computer per some template.
The
specs tell him what size and type of material to put in. He does it,
turns
the thing on, changes the bits for the different cutting tasks as they
come
up in the course of the program, and patiently waits for the mystery
to
resolve. You know, what is this thing going to look like?
At that, point, we both got it. I got what his experience is like. He
got
why he loves his work so much: the resolution of secret mystery.
(Other
people don't even know there's mystery. He gets to have that particular
fun
all to himself!)
Later, after several meetings of trying all kinds of things,
including
running incidents just to see what _I_ would have to do to make it work
for
people like him (like you, Ant?), we had developed a completely
different
way of running incidents. It's based on information, yet it gets
emotions,
feelings and self-images as well as it gets decisions.
All of the content of an incident can be described as data, same as
the
parts my client makes. You don't have to "see" it to address
and discuss
it, unless you're being asked to perform in visual terms. Then you
are
misdirected by the visual-metaphorical context of the procedure, which
must
fail for lack of applicability to you.
>
Incidentally I got fed up with trying remedies for black
>
cases.
I now believe that trying to "remedy" a "condition"
of Black 5 is a crime.
The crime is trying to make an alternate form of perception wrong.
The
motivation isn't criminal, it's based on a preconceived notion that
we're
all the same. I had it myself. Until that client screamed that No, he
did
not _see_, I thought everyone did. I hadn't even paid that much
attention
to the stuff about Black 5's in the old school because the whole idea
was
completely unreal to me. No it's not the intent that's criminal. It's
the
effects on the client that are criminal. The invalidation. The
eternally
being "missed" (not seen as-is). The unnamed feeling of
distance and even
alienation that comes from the sense that other people are talking
about
something that is only nonsense to you alone. And more, probably. (I
could
dig out the session notes: he gave me quite a list when we finally got
a
runnable process put together.)
>
> Right - now to
TROM.
...
>
Unsatisfying, uncomfortable. drudgery. I
don't have
> details
available, but that was the way I found it. And this
> I believe was
because I could not _see_ the important things
> I was mocking
up, or the things I was time breaking.
...
>
People do vary. What is right for one is not neccessarily
> right
for the rest of the population
of earth (and
>
satilites).
...
>
We have a fair number of silent people on this list. This
> is the case
with all lists, and there is nothing wrong in
> that. But I
wonder if, amongst the silent there are not one
> or two like
me, who have not got anything out of TROM, but
> are impressed
by it.
I guess I'm in a peculiar category. I'm a guest on this list because
a
couple of my articles have been posted here. I don't have the TROM
materials and have never tried it. It's on my list for my next spate
of
research. And I'm not a B5. But I have noticed the winning I hear about
on
this list and elsewhere. And it just occurs to me now that my slowness
in
looking at TROM has been because, I "see" now, I had
subliminally already
understood from people's discussion of it that TROM includes highly
visual
processes. So without even looking at it I'd already discounted its
universality.
Anyway, from my peculiar place of having redeveloped all of my procedures
so
that none of them ask for any particular sensory perception, even
metaphorically, I suddenly suspect I might have what anyone with a
"missing"
sensory perceptic could use. Why should I be surprised?! That is what
I
set out to do those several years ago. But it had until now escaped me
that
there might actually be a second or third person, or hundreds more,
who
needed it! Still operating from my own paradigm, I guess. :-)
I plan to be sharing those procedures in the near future. I'm not sure
in
what modality. We can talk about that if you or anybody wants..
I guess for now, rather than make hints of something and not deliver it,
I
just wanted to let you know that I understand that you are not
defective,
just different. An isolated minority in a huge majority, Yes, but even
then
not alone and certainly not un-understood. And to offer you some
comfort
that there are even more alternatives than commonly known about.
- - - Topic 2 - - -
>
>
I also have another "gripe" with regard to
TROM - and
> also other
therapies. And that is the inclusion of the word
> and subject
Nirvana. One of the things I object to in latter
> day
scientology is the covert "implanting"
of goals to
> adherants,
rather than letting them decide their own life. A
> particularly
nasty one is the goal scientology "suggested"
> to adherants
of "total freedom". And Dennis, unfortunately,
> has done
something similar, by glorifying a state he calls
>
Nirvanah.
I think we all do that, whether we mean to be misdirecting or not.
It's
something I've been seriously reconsidering with regard to
Acceptance.
>
>
My view of a therapy or religious practice is
that it
> should be
something to help people through the "downs"
in
> life, and
enable them to achieve full enjoyment of
(and
> ability to
produce) "ups" in life. And that they should have
> freedom of
choice on their goals and aspirations. And not
> have insidouos
hints as to what was "right" or acceptable.
Absolutely. But that is the "practice" part. Most people want
more than
that in their lives, and there's whence comes our motivation for
explaining
our philosophies as well.
I know that my procedures don't work well in the hands of
other-school
practitioners who unwittingly conform them to their own beliefs when
theirs
are different from mine. But I am also convinced that they will work
very
well delivered from a neutral perspective. Which is as it should
be.
So I for one have been pounding on Acceptance as a whole to see if it
can't
come apart into distinct parts that each can stand alone, among which
any
combination of the parts works as a complimentary subset, and the
totality
of which works as a seamless whole that yet includes
"options".
It looks doable, but for the time involved.
>
>
I would censor out all discussion of Nirvanah in
TROM
> (the book I
mean).
Right. Each "aspect" in its own niche.
I hope this gives you something.
-0-
PS: May I share this with Accept-L? Any edits you'd want first?
Allen, Speaker for Acceptance
| Acceptance Services Center
[email protected]
-0- Box 390696 Mtn Vw CA 94039
http://www.asc.org
|
(415) 964-3436
Email list: [email protected] to subscribe; FAQ on
Website
Subject ok No signature, just the word subscribe as the message
content.
Subject:
Black Fives
Date:
Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:03:05
-0400
From:
[email protected] (William T
Fenton)
To:
[email protected]
Dear Antony,
Your contribution to TROM-L about BLACK FIVES was very interesting as
it
hit rather close to home.
In my early auditing (50s), I felt as you did that there must be
something wrong with me bcause I couldn't get this clear picture in
color
of my mock-ups or recalls. It was also my understanding, at the
time,
that my visio would turn on somewhere along the line as a result of
auditing. But this never happened all the way up through OT VII.
There
were, however, glimpses of it from time to time. A scene would flash
on
for an instant occasionally.
Gradually I came to realize that certainty of what was there in
mock-ups
and recalls was sufficient. This was confirmed by Dennis in the TROM
manuscript when he said that it is not necessary to perceive one's
creations.
I feel that the assignment of a lessor ability to what was called a
"Black Five Case" was one of Ron's major misunderstoods. I
learned in
later years (late 80s early 90s) that experience is recorded as
feelings
(emotional vibrations). These feelings can be translated by a being
into
visio or any of the other perceptions when recalled. When charge is
being erased, it seems to me that the charge is in the feelings of
the
incident rather than in the visio.
You are right when you say that black five cases are not so bad
after
all. But that judgement did hurt and caused me a bent wallet from
the
unnecessary many extra hours of book & bottle and other
objectives.
Thanks for sharing your experience with Black Five.
Best
Bill
Subject:
Black Fives
Date:
Sat, 30 Aug 1997 14:25:00
-0400
From:
"Dustin W. Carr"
<[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Hello,
I found the two previous posts on black fives very interesting. I am
glad
that both Bill and Antony have not found this to be too big of a
barrier.
Here are my ideas, intended to promote discussion, of course.
First of all, I do not see this as too much of a problem. It might even
be
a special ability, and could indicate an advanced case. I don't have
pictures any more, only emotional vibrations as Bill had
mentioned.
Don't put things in the past unless you must. Timebreaking is an
unfortunate term. It is not necessary to view across time. View what
is
in present time. It is not necessary to know anything of the past.
Look
at what is in the present time (if you are blind in present time, then
I
use the word look to mean take in all perceptions from within and
without
in the present time).
Lack of an ability is never something that holds a person back.
Those
things we can not do are as important as those that we can. They
define
us, and they are part of the aesthetic that is the self. Somebody may
soon
communicate the ideas of trom in a way that make pictures quite
unimportant.
I can not throw a football like Dan Marino. While this distresses me
greatly, I must acknowledge that it has not really held me back in my
life,
even if it has kept me out of professional football.
The compulsion to make pictures is equivalent to the inability to
make
pictures.
When I do RI, I actually avoid making pictures. I either send out
energy,
effortlessly, and let it go completely. Or I receive energy,
effortlessly,
letting it completely dissolve into my existence.
Pictures are not observations of what actually exists or did exist,
they
are a representation of how our own creations interact with each
other.
There are other representations, most of which are more revealing of
the
true nature of things.
Some may say this black five is a problem, but it may just be an
indication
of the type of path of you should follow. If you can not make
pictures,
then you don't need to do so. Seek to do that which is aligned with
your
present abilities. When you seek after other abilities, then you are
acknowledging that one state is more desirable than another. This leads
to
the compulsive playing of games. We are trying to avoid that.
A visual picture is just a recording of a limited type of perception.
This
perception is sensitive only to electromagnetic radiation that has
frequencies of about 1000000000000000 cycles per second (this is at
least
true of any memories that you have in this or similar bodies). This is
a
very limited range of the spectrum, and there is nothing of any
particular
significance to it. The world looks drastically different when viewed
at
different rates.
We could equivalently say why we can't observe and be aware of things
that
occur on much shorter time scales. We are carried into the future by
a
physical world that is changing at rates well beyond that which is
perceptible. Most of us have an inability to willfully create change at
a
rate that is even remotely comparable to that which occurs all around us
in
the world we live.
Have fun,
Dustin
Dustin W. Carr
Cornell University Physics Department
G-6 Clark Hall
Ithaca NY, 14853
[email protected]
Subject:
Re: Replay 24
Date:
Sun, 31 Aug 1997 12:23:13 -0400
(EDT)
From:
"Homer W. Smith"
<[email protected]>
CC:
[email protected]
> Here is another reply.
>
> We have got another subscriber on the list. An old timer on the
Internet
> who did not know the list existed. So we could do more to
make
> ourselves known!
>
> Hi,
>
> Ant
One way is to let the list spill one way into a.c.t.
Homer
Subject:
Dustin's Post of 8/30/97
Date:
Sun, 31 Aug 1997 19:42:17
-0400
From:
[email protected] (William T
Fenton)
To:
[email protected]
Thank you very much for your ideas on the subject of "Black
Fives". They
have clarified my own thoughts in the areas of timebreaking, past
and
present, and perception of the higher vibrations.
Best
Bill Fenton
Subject:
Re: Thanks
Date:
Mon, 01 Sep 1997 07:52:56
-0400
From:
"Dustin W. Carr"
<[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Ant,
Thanks for your acknowledgement. I have some further comment.
The significant part about trom has little to do with pictures. In fact,
it
has little to do with the time track even. It is about the constant
cycle
of events, or choices, that drive us from the present into the future.
I do not want to leap to the defense of trom. I think Stephens
communicated
parts of it quite dreadfully, but the fragment of the fragment of truth
is
still there. That truth is in the cycle called the postulate failure
chart.
I am not attached to trom, and I see no advantage to having a
cleared
planet. (all things are relative, a cleared planet would still consist
of
those cleared more than others. Nothing would really be changed)
However, I feel that maybe you stopped attempting to apply trom when
you
encountered a barrier. A barrier created by imperfect communication from
he
who first brought this path to our world.
I would suggest you still look to see how you can apply trom. I have
some
ideas. I do not mean to invalidate, and if you are completely content
with
the idea that trom can not bring change to your life, then I certainly
will
not argue.
It seemed to me that maybe you were not so content. But, this is an
imperfect medium in which to communicate.
Take care,
Dustin
At 07:59 AM 8/31/97 +0200, you wrote:
>Thanks for a rather profound contribtion on Black fives - which I
will
>take a little time out to consider.
>
>All the best,
>
>Ant
>--
>
Ant
Antony A Phillips
> [email protected]
>
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
>
Box 78
>
DK - 2800 Lyngby
>Editor, International Viewpoints (= IVy) see Home Page:
>
http://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html
>
>
>
Dustin W. Carr
[email protected]
Cornell University Physics
Clark Hall G-6
Ithaca, NY 14853
--
Ant
Antony A Phillips
[email protected]
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
Box 78
DK - 2800 Lyngby
Editor, International Viewpoints (= IVy). See Home Page:
http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/
Administrator: trom-l, selfclearing-l, superscio-l, IVy
lists
***************
Replies, comments, to the list, send to [email protected]
***************
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
Ingen virus fundet i denne meddelelse.
Kontrolleret af AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7303 / Virusdatabase: 4545/11883 - Udgivelsesdato:
25-03-2016
--
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
